Case Summary (G.R. No. 186472)
Factual narrative and chronology
Between 6:00 and 7:00 p.m. of December 27, 1998, Siongco induced 11‑year‑old Nikko to board a bus to Pilar, Bataan, allegedly to secure a “Gameboy.” Accompanying him were Bonsol and Enriquez. The party proceeded to Mariveles and Dinalupihan where Nikko was kept overnight. From December 28 onward the abductors moved the boy to Metro Manila (Bicutan, then Pateros). On December 29, 1998, Siongco telephoned Elvira, identifying himself as custodian of Nikko and demanding ransom (initially P400,000 reduced to P300,000). Threats were made that Nikko would be killed if payment was not made. On December 31, 1998, Elvira, assisted by PAOCTF, attended a pay‑off at Genesis Bus Station in Pasay; Enriquez was arrested at the scene after accepting a brown envelope while Siongco fled but was later arrested at Heracleo San Jose’s house in Pateros, where Nikko was also retrieved. Subsequent investigations led to the arrest of Bonsol, Hayco and Boton.
Procedural history
An Information alleging kidnapping and serious illegal detention for purpose of extorting ransom (Article 267, as amended) was filed on January 4, 1999. The accused pleaded not guilty and underwent trial with the prosecution presenting the victim, the victim’s mother, a relative (Heracleo), and PAOCTF officers as witnesses. The Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 166, Pasig City, convicted Siongco, Bonsol, Enriquez and Hayco on November 6, 2000, sentencing them to death and awarding moral damages of P50,000 each to the victim and his mother; Boton was acquitted for reasonable doubt. The case underwent automatic review; pursuant to People v. Mateo the Supreme Court transferred the case to the Court of Appeals (CA) for intermediate review. The CA, in a September 20, 2007 decision, affirmed the conviction but modified the penalty to reclusion perpetua without parole, increased moral damages to P100,000, and awarded P100,000 exemplary damages. Siongco and Bonsol appealed to the Supreme Court; the Supreme Court affirmed the CA’s findings of guilt and the reclusion perpetua penalty, adjusted the civil and moral damage awards (final disposition summarized below).
Statutory elements and legal standards applied
The Court set out the elements of kidnapping and serious illegal detention under Article 267 (as amended): (a) offender is a private individual; (b) he kidnaps or detains another or otherwise deprives him of liberty; (c) the detention is illegal; and (d) one or more qualifying circumstances exist (detention longer than three days; simulation of public authority; serious physical injuries or threats to kill; or victim is a minor, female or public officer). The Court reiterated that when the victim is a minor or the detention is for ransom, the duration element becomes immaterial. The essence of the offense is actual deprivation of liberty plus proof of the offender’s intent to effect such deprivation.
Application of law to the facts: deprivation of liberty and consent
The Court found the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the elements were satisfied. Although Nikko was occasionally permitted to play and was not physically shackled, he remained under the captors’ custody and control in unfamiliar places and could not return home on his own; thus his liberty was effectively deprived. The Court stressed that voluntary accompaniment does not negate kidnapping when induced by false promises or fraud; the initial consent obtained through deception is not valid. Because Nikko was an 11‑year‑old minor, his consent is legally presumed absent and cannot provide a defense. The Court relied on controlling jurisprudence that a victim’s voluntary movement with the accused under false pretenses still constitutes deprivation of liberty.
Conspiracy and the shared criminal responsibility of appellants
The Court concluded that appellants conspired and mutually aided one another in the kidnapping and detention. Siongco’s inducement (promise of a Gameboy), his role in directing the boy to companions, his participation in transporting the boy to Metro Manila and his ransom demands and threats established orchestration. Bonsol’s participation in the initial abduction and in the movements that enabled the extortion established his liability as a conspirator; in conspiracy the act of one is imputed to all conspirators whether they acted as principal or accomplice. The Court held the evidence of collaboration and mutual assistance sufficient to uphold convictions.
Right to counsel issue and court’s analysis under constitutional standards
Appellants claimed denial of the right to independent and competent counsel because the RTC appointed Atty. Michael Moralde as counsel de oficio during hearings including the cross‑examination of the victim, while Atty. Antoniano of the Public Attorney’s Office (PAO) — the regular counsel de oficio — was absent. The Court applied the constitutional guarantee to counsel (under the 1987 Constitution) and relevant precedents permitting appointment of a substitute de oficio counsel when retained or regular counsel is absent and when the court, in the interest of progressing trial under the continuous trial system, finds such appointment necessary. The Court found no deprivation of the right to counsel: the substitute counsel was competent and independent; he expressly limited his cross‑examination to protect conflicts (he stated questions were for his client Boton), and the regular PAO counsel was furnished with transcripts and afforded opportunity to perform additional cross‑examination in subsequent hearings. Precedents cited by th
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 186472)
Procedural History
- Case reported at 637 Phil. 488, Second Division; docketed G.R. No. 186472, July 05, 2010.
- Review is from the September 20, 2007 Decision of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 00774, which affirmed the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 166, Pasig City decision of November 6, 2000, with modifications on penalty and damages.
- The appeal to the Supreme Court (SC) was accepted in a Resolution dated April 13, 2009; the SC denied the appeal and affirmed the CA decision with modifications.
- Case was initially filed by the Department of Justice via an Information dated January 4, 1999; arraignment occurred on February 24, 1999, where the accused pleaded not guilty.
- From the RTC the case went directly to the SC for automatic review (docketed G.R. No. 146756); consistent with People v. Mateo, the case was transferred to the CA for intermediate review and disposition and later returned to the SC for final resolution.
- Only appellants Antonio Siongco and Allan Bonsol perfected appeal from the CA decision; the CA declared the convictions of Eriberto Enriquez and George Hayco final and executory in its September 29, 2008 Resolution.
Factual Background and Chronology
- On the evening of December 27, 1998 (between 6:00 and 7:00 p.m.), 11‑year‑old Nikko Satimbre (Nikko), a resident of Balanga, Bataan, was induced by Antonio Siongco to board a bus bound for Pilar, Bataan together with Marion Boton and Eriberto Enriquez; Nikko was told the two would accompany him to get a "Gameboy" promised by Siongco.
- Siongco was known to Nikko as a former security guard at Footlockers where Nikko’s mother, Elvira Satimbre (Elvira), worked as cashier.
- After a short stop in Pilar, the group proceeded to Mariveles, Bataan, where they met George Hayco; the boy was then brought to Dinalupihan, Bataan and kept for the night.
- Elvira arrived home at about 7:00 p.m. that night and found her son missing; she searched common places and then reported him missing to the nearest police detachment.
- On December 28, 1998, Enriquez and Siongco took Nikko to Bicutan, Taguig, Metro Manila.
- On December 29, 1998, Elvira received a phone call from a man later identified as Siongco who claimed custody of Nikko and demanded P400,000 for his release; Elvira negotiated the sum down to P300,000. During that call Elvira spoke briefly to Nikko, who said only “Hello Ma” before Siongco grabbed the phone; Siongco warned her not to report to police and threatened that Nikko would be killed if ransom was not paid at 6:00 p.m. the next day at Genesis Bus Station in Pasay City.
- That night Elvira reported the kidnapping to the Office of the Chief of Police of Balanga, Bataan.
- On December 30, 1998, Enriquez and Siongco moved Nikko to Pateros and stayed at the house of Heracleo San Jose, a relative of Enriquez; they again called Elvira and instructed her to proceed to Avenida at midnight with available money, but Elvira refused and insisted on giving the ransom in full.
- On December 31, 1998, multiple calls were made by Siongco to Elvira; Elvira agreed to meet that afternoon at Genesis Bus Station, and Nikko was allowed a call assuring his mother he was not being maltreated. Enriquez told Nikko his mother wanted a "kaliwaan" (face-to-face exchange).
- During the pay-off attempt, the Philippine Anti-Organized Crime Task Force (PAOCTF) was involved in an operation that led to the arrest of Enriquez at Genesis Bus Station and the subsequent arrest of Siongco at Heracleo's residence in Pateros, where Nikko was rescued; follow-up operations led to the arrest of Allan Bonsol and the other cohorts Hayco and Boton.
Arrests, Rescue, and Investigation
- Elvira was instructed by PAOCTF to bring a brown envelope with a letter asking for extension of payment as part of an arranged operation.
- While waiting at Genesis Bus Station, PAOCTF operatives observed Enriquez and Siongco moving restlessly; Enriquez took the brown envelope from Elvira and was arrested as he walked away.
- Siongco attempted to flee by hailing a taxicab but was arrested later at Heracleo's residence in Pateros; Nikko was rescued from that residence.
- Police Senior Inspector Rodolfo Azurin, Jr. of PAOCTF was on duty at Camp Crame and participated in the operation; Police Superintendent Paul Tucay later arrested Bonsol, Hayco and Boton as a result of follow-up operations.
- Investigations included statements from Nikko and the detained suspects, and police follow-up operations that resulted in the arrest of other suspects.
Charges, Information, and Legal Basis
- Information filed January 4, 1999, charged Antonio Siongco, Eriberto Enriquez, George Hayco, Marion Boton, Allan Bonsol, and a "John Doe" with Kidnapping and Serious Illegal Detention under Article 267 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Section 8 of R.A. No. 7659, alleging kidnapping of 11‑year‑old Nikko from Balanga, Bataan to Pateros, Metro Manila lasting more than three days and committed for the purpose of extorting ransom.
- Article 267, as quoted in the record, defines kidnapping and serious illegal detention, lists aggravating circumstances, and prescribes penalties (reclusion perpetua to death under certain conditions and death where kidnapping was for the purpose of extorting ransom).
Trial: Witnesses, Evidence, and Testimony
- The prosecution presented the following witnesses: the victim Nikko (11 years old), his mother Elvira, Heracleo San Jose (relative of Enriquez), Police Senior Inspector Azurin, Jr. (PAOCTF), and Police Superintendent Paul Tucay (arrested Bonsol, Hayco, Boton).
- All accused except Marion Boton testified.
- Siongco’s testimony:
- Claimed he saw Nikko at a "peryahan" in Balanga on December 27 and did not mind the boy; stated he was busy discussing toy-selling business with Enriquez.
- Claimed presence in Manila at Heracleo's house on December 28–29 to collect installment payments from customers; claimed he went to his brother's house in San Juan on December 31 and was arrested upon return to Pateros.
- Enriquez’s testimony:
- Alleged Nikko went with them voluntarily; confirmed traveling with Nikko and Siongco to Manila, staying in Bicutan then moving to Pateros.
- Claimed they called Nikko’s mother because the boy kept asking for a "Gameboy;" stated Nikko’s mother would have “something tied around her neck” at Genesis Bus Station.
- Hayco and Bonsol denied knowledge of and participation in the crime; Boton did not testify at trial.
Trial Court Findings and Judgment (RTC, November 6, 2000)
- The RTC found the accused conspired and mutually helped one another in kidnapping and illegally detaining Nikko, transporting him from Balanga to Metro Manila where ransom demands were made.
- RTC convicted Antonio Siongco, Eriberto Enriquez, George Hayco, and Allan Bonsol of Kidnapping and Serious Illegal Detention for the purpose of extorting ransom under Article 267, as amended by R.A. No. 7659.
- Sentence imposed by RTC: the Supreme penalty of Death on Siongco, Enriquez, Hayco, and Bonsol.
- RTC awarded moral damages of P50,000.00 each to Nikko and to his mother Elvira, and imposed costs of suit.
- Marion Boton was acquitted on grounds of reasonable doubt.
- RTC excerpted fallo: found accused guilty beyond reasonable doubt and sentenced to death; Boton found not guilty.
Court of Appeals Disposition
- CA affirmed the RTC's factual findings and conclusions but modified the penalty from death to reclusion perpetua.
- CA increased moral damages to P100,000.00 and awarded exemplary damages of P100,000.00, to be paid jointly and solidarily by the accused to the victim Nikko.
- CA decision dat